Timesuck with Dan Cummins - 80 - America's Guns: What is the Real Problem?

Episode Date: March 26, 2018

Toughest topic I’ve tackled so far. Marches going on across the country to ban assault rifles. School walkouts. Gun rights advocates staging their own protests. Celebrities posting all kinds of feel good, emotional quotes. But are we looking at this issue the right away? After my research this past few weeks, I don't think so. Let's stop polarizing this discussion. The current issue runs a lot deeper than getting rid of a gun or class of guns. So let’s go deep, Timesuckers! Prepare to be bombarded with so many stats about guns. We deep dive into America’s history with firearms and explore what the real problem with mass murder is in this nation, today, on Timesuck! Merch - https://badmagicmerch.com/ Want to try out Discord!?! https://discord.gg/tqzH89v Want to join the Cult of the Curious private Facebook Group? Go directly to Facebook and search for "Cult of the Curious" in order to locate whatever current page hasn't been put in FB Jail :) For all merch related questions: https://badmagicmerch.com/pages/contact Please rate and subscribe on iTunes and elsewhere and follow the suck on social media!! @timesuckpodcast on IG, @timesuckpodcast on Twitter, and www.facebook.com/timesuckpodcast Wanna be a Space Lizard"? Go here: https://www.patreon.com/timesuckpodcast Sign up through Patreon and for $5 a month you get to listen to the Secret Suck, which will drop Thursdays at Noon, PST. You'll also get 20% off of all regular Timesuck merch PLUS access to exclusive Space Lizard merch. You get to vote on two Monday topics each month via the app. And you get the download link for my new comedy album, Feel the Heat. Check the Patreon posts to find out how to download the new album and take advantage of other benefits. And, thank you for supporting the show by doing your Amazon shopping after clicking on my Amazon link at www.timesuckpodcast.com

Wow, so much gun talk right now. I had no idea the topic guns would be so topical when I picked this topic to suck into a month or so back. Toughest topic I've tackled so far easily. Marjors going on across the country to ban assault rifles, school walkouts, gun rights advocates staging their own protests, celebrities, posts and all kinds of feel good, mostly meaningless, honestly, emotional quotes.

But how many celebrities, high school kids, protesters, gun rights activists actually know what they're yelling about? After all the research I poured over the past few weeks, I gotta say sadly, not many. And I feel like the media has done a really, really shitty job of tackling this issue. This shit is so much more complex than getting rid of a gun or a class of guns. It's much deeper than that. So let's go deep time suckers. I know you can do it.

Let's deep dive into America's history with firearms and explore what the real problem is with mass murder in this country today on TimeSuck. Hello, listener. Hello, time-sucker. Hello, fun, curious human meat sack. I'm Dan Cummins and this is TimeSuck. And TimeSuck is brought to you today by Breach. Breach is a new kick-ass podcast brought to you by Midrall. A podcast team started looking into the biggest hack in history and ended up in the middle of their own story. A mysterious voicemail disappearing files, it got personal. Breaches a new podcast that takes you inside the world's biggest hacks. They set out to answer questions about the hack of a huge American company and found

themselves investigating a Russian conspiracy. So subscribe to Breach BR-E-A-C C H in your podcast app right now episode one drops today. March 26. I listen to the trailer man very well produced, very interesting. Yeah, this is a this looks to be a very kick ass podcast. So check it out. And all right time, suckers. Couple quick things and then we're getting in today's episode right.

Had a blast and cleave it holy shit Saturday shows were sold out Thursday and Friday shows were fantastic as well so many time suckers that everyone got some more amazing stuff for the suck dungeon Including a super cool shot glass crafty with a sculpture of my crazy face. It's amazing Got some conquer spaniel blood to a piece Nimrod hail Nimrod Of course is not real blood, I'd ask. It's some crazy Hungarian sauce, but made to look like blood.

And so many teachers in the crowd, man, you guys are making these shows the most fun of my entire career. Can't thank you enough. One audience member did not have fun on Saturday, a time-soaked fan who is also a flat earth believer, got pissed in my new flat earth material, it's the flat earth tour and left the show.

Sorry, brother, I can't go there. I can't pretend your belief in a flat earth has any basis in anything other than whack-a-doodle madness. We can agree on plenty of other shit, so I hope you still enjoy the show. I hate when people think they can only be friends or like people who just have to agree with them on everything, it's fucking ridiculous.

Important to have plenty of friends in my life who in certain ways, I think they're fucking insane. But, you know, and I'm sure I'm sure I think so about me as well. Positive. Thanks again for all the recent iTunes reviews. I mean, you guys are so good. Me, Hail Nimrod. Hail, Hail Luciferina. Why not? Helbo Jangles. Triple M. Chick-Tillow. This whole thing is fun. And the reviews have been fantastic. My favorite reason one is from Prima, Eric Peek. It's so funny to me.

They wrote saying, listening to Time Suck with Dan Cummins is like walking into a slightly grungy bar and finding a crowd gathered around a very loud man, gesticulating wildly and occasionally leaping into the air and spinning around. Drawn like a rubber neck or two a wreck, you join the outer periphery. So you can get a better look. He's compelling and revolting brilliant and idiotic, but ultimately informative and entertaining.

Next thing you know, you're in the front row, brought by and around for the house. That'll do Dan Cummins. That'll do. Wow. Premio, Eric Peekman, are you a writer writer that was some delightful word wizardry you just threw down Thank you so much. That was beautiful now come see me We got to next I started a big old comedy run big old flat earth tour continues to see how many more people I can piss off

I'll be a bit Charlotte North Carolina in April 8th. That one is packing out man Atlanta on night on the ninth Birmingham on the 10th Huntsville Alabama come out on come on out NASA. Let's talk about the flatters on the 11th. Nashville, Tennessee on the 12th, Houston, Texas, 13th, Dallas, Texas, the 14th, San Antonio, Texas on the 15th, and Salt Lake City, Utah. One of the very first towns I ever started getting invited back to. The city I recorded, don't like the barren on the 20th and 21st of April, links in the episode description to the venues Flatters tour continues

San Francisco Sacramento Phoenix coming up right out right afterwards in May another live time stock podcast and spill can on May 6 Only one I'll be doing until Orlando late in the summer. So get there. It's gonna be so much sucking fucking fun More tour dates Dancomas.tv and space lizards. I made contact with David I. psychic the other day and paid for the deluxe reading. Oh, it's happening. 33 business days. Max, it's gonna be glorious. Last thank you.

Thanks to the time suckers going to time suck podcast.com, clicking that Amazon button to take you to Amazon.com to do your shopping and help time suck while you do so. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Now let's get into guns. All right, made sense to me to start off today by revisiting the second amendment because that's where this all began. So let's do that now. On September 25th, 1789, the first Congress of the United States proposed 12 amendments to the Constitution.

The 1789 joint resolution of Congress proposing the amendments is on display in the Rotunda in the National Archives Museum in Washington, DC if you want to check it out. Ten of the proposed 12 amendments were ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures on December 15th, 1791. The second amendment is the one we're talking about today, and like most of the others, surprisingly brief. Only 27 words. It says, in its entirety, a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep in bear arms shall not be infringed. And holy shit is the nation divided right now

over how much arms we should be able to bear today or if we should even be able to bear them at all. Here are a few other amendments just for a little historical context. We got the first amendment, my favorite as a comic, saying Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of the people peacefully to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances free speech motherfuckers free speech make my living off it couldn't do this podcast without it not even close then there's the fourth amendment the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. She'll not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Yeah, no legal search and seizure. You don't just get to wallets in and take my shit Uncle Sam. Where'd you warrant, you dick?

Show me the papers. This is in 1930s Germany. This isn't most of the 20th century in Russia. Don't tread on me, motherfucker. And then there's a 9th Amendment. Congress shall not dictate personal insabilities regardless of the establishment or abolishment of henceforth to create prior ordinances that decode or decipher a variety of fraudulent or spurious reports of either a beneficial or detrimental nature. Moreover, prospective claims to the

contrary can include non-erroneous, but otherwise misleading controversy shall forfeit all previous conditions. And if you're not familiar with that amendment, that's because I just made that shit up. How confusing was that? How confused were you getting with that old timey lingo? That was a joy to write. That one was so much fun for me. So much fun to think about. So many of you trying so hard to follow the insane logic of the utter nonsense.

I just word vomited into your earholes. No, the amendment says the enumeration and the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. So basically the founding fathers said, we know these rights can't possibly cover everything going forward. Newschitz gonna come up and you fuckers gonna have to figure that out for yourselves. But back to the second amendment, the right to bear arms.

Why was that right considered so important? It ranked right behind freedom. Well, because sometimes you actually have to fight for freedom. And when that's happened historically, guns, you know, have come in pretty handy. Founding father James Madison originally proposed a second amendment shortly after the Constitution was officially ratified as a way to provide more power

to state malicious, which today are considered the national guard. It was deemed to compromise between federalists, those who supported the Constitution as it was ratified, and the anti-federalists, those who supported states having more power. Having just used guns and other arms to ward off the British, the amendment was originally created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a tyrannical federal government. Freedom doesn't always come cheap.

And the founding fathers do that all too well. Some of them have just been shot at, some of them have shot others in the war. Since its ratification, Americans have been arguing over the amendments meaning and interpretation. One side interprets the amendment to mean it provides for collective rights. While the opposing view is that it provides individual rights. Those who take the collective side think the amendment gives each state the right to maintain and train formal formal militia units that can provide protection against an oppressive federal government they

argue that well regulated militia clause uh... clearly means the right to bear arms should only be given to those organized groups now they believe this allows for only those in official militia to carry guns legally and say the federal government cannot abolish state militias those with the opposite viewpoint which seem to be the majority of citizens, or at least the majority until the recent rash of public shootings and protests, believe the amendment gives every citizen the right to own guns, free of federal regulations to protect themselves in the face of danger. The individualists believe the amendments militia clause was never meant to restrict each

citizen's right to bear arms. Those supporting an individual's right to own a gun, such as the National Rifle Association, argue the second amendment should give all citizens not just members of a militia, the right to own a gun. Those supporting stricter gun control like the Brady campaign believe the second amendment is not a blank check for anyone to own a gun. They feel the restrictions on firearms, such as who can have them under what conditions, where they can be taken, and what types of firearms are available are necessary. Now, quick note on the Brady bill, because it's pretty

historic, uh, pretty historically important as far as US gun control is concerned. During a White House ceremony, attended by James S Brady on November 30th, 1993, President Bill Clinton signed the Brady handgun control bill into law. The law requires a perspective or required a perspective handgun buyers wait five business days while the authorities check his or her background during which time the sale was approved or prohibited based on established set of criteria. 1931 James Brady who served as press secretary for President Reagan was shot in the head by John Hinckley, Jr. during the attempt on President Reagan's life outside of hotel in DC. Reagan himself was shot in his left lung, but recovered and returned to the White House within two weeks, which is pretty fucking impressive. You know, he was not a young man when he was in the White House. Old man takes a shot

to the lung two weeks later, is like, nah, let's go sign some more papers. Brady, the most seriously injured in the attack, was momentarily pronounced dead at the hospital, but survived and began an impressive recovery from his debilitating brain injury. During the 1980s, Brady became a leading proponent of gun control legislation in 1987, succeeded in getting a bill introduced into Congress. The Brady bill, as it became known,

was staunchly opposed by many congressmen who in reference to the Second Amendment, to the US Constitution, questioned the constitutionality of regulating the ownership of arms. In 1993, with the support of President Clinton, an advocate of gun control, the Brady bill became a law. Well, over 100 million background checks have been conducted since that law took effect. And then in 1994, Clinton signed the law, the public safety and recreational firearms use

protection act. It's very wordy title, placed from restrictions on the number of military features a semi-automatic gun could have, and banning large capacity magazines for consumer use. Under the assault weapons ban in 1994, the definition of semi-automatic assault weapon included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name,

other semi-automatic firearms that possess two or more from a certain set of features. Sematic rifles or semi-automatic rifles, excuse me, able to accept attachable magazines and two or more of the following would be banned. Folding or telescoping stock, pistol grip, bayonet mount, this is having a bayonet mount. Flashed oppressor, a device attached to the muzzle of a rifle that reduces its visible signature while firing by cooling or dispersing the burning gases that exit the muzzle, phenomenon,

typical of carbene length weapons. Primary intent is to reduce the chances that the shooter will be blinded in low light shooting conditions. Contrary to popular belief, it's only a minor, excuse me, secondary benefit if the flash suppressor reduces the intensity of the flash visible to the enemy. Grenade launcher was also on the list. I gotta say that seems reasonable.

You know, banning, semi-automatic rifle, somebody wants to attach a bayonet and a fucking Grenade launcher to. Jesus Christ, I mean, look, I get it, sounds fun. I mean, yeah, I want a shoot one, now that I talk about it, I would love to shoot a grenade. But wanting to do something, not always a good reason to have it be legal.

I also would love to make a time bomb and blow up a building, not one with anybody in it. But I just think it would be fun to blow up a fucking building. I mean, come on, that'd be pretty sweet, especially with the time bomb, you know, you just fucking walk away like in a movie, and then maybe like as you walk in the behind you, just pfffck, fucking crumbles, and you did that with your brain power and explosives

Doesn't make it a good idea doesn't make it something that should ever be done Yeah, just be exciting. I mean I spent a few solid months in high school trying to make bombs I didn't have any enemies. I wanted to kill. I just wanted to blow some structures up. I wanted to fucking cost them mayhem You know when I finally watched that movie, oh my god, Fight Club. It spoke to me way more than it should have. And it is a little crazy to me that I could attach a grenade launcher

to a semi-automatic military styrofoil and have a fucking bayonet on it. He's Christ. As you'll find out soon, live in an Idaho, I can pretty much have almost anything. I could have a one with a bayonet if I pass the right paperwork checks, which I might not be able to, based on being arrested for DUI and a separate incident of city theft

when I was younger, I may not be able to actually get these, but potentially, I could also have an M16. If I had the right background, more on that later. The primary topic of conversation and gun debate today is the AR-15. That seems to be the hot topic. Most states you can have one. In some states, you can buy under the barrel grenade launcher right now. I actually found a pretty cool looking one online for $1,500 at gunbroker.com, where I could

also buy grenades. In some states, grenades consider a title two weapon under the National Firearms Act. Each state is determined which title to weapons if any are allowed within its borders. Like Hawaii, for example, no grenades. Idaho, you can have up to three nuclear warheads per household. I'm fucking kidding. But in Idaho, no title to weapons are banned.

You can have grenades, which are classified as destructive devices. You can have machine guns, silencers, short barrel, short barrel shotguns, short barrel rifles. All sorts of shit if you pass the right background checks, which makes me nervous about my neighbors a little bit. I'm kind of arsenal they could potentially have. The Assault Weapons Band passed by Clinton expired on September 13th, 2004 was not renewed. More on current gun laws later,

sadly they're very confusing and they differ wildly from a state to state, which I think is part of the national problem right now. You know, it's very hard to argue about something effectively for or against and have a real discussion about it when it's almost impossible to determine exactly what the fuck is going on. Before we move on, let's talk about confirmation bias real quick. What is confirmation bias?

Well, it's the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories. It's something I fight all the time on this podcast. Sometimes I do a better job, you know, fighting it than others. In the context of today, example of confirmation bias would be coming into the episode with either a guns of the worst thing ever and the root of all evil and getting rid of them would make everything wonderful and peaceful and everyone would start holding hands and love each other and comb each other's hair and sit and drum circles and be the fucking best extremely far left angle.

Another example of confirmation bias will be coming into this episode with a guns with the only things keeping the government from turning the citizenry into some type of dystopian group of slaves and without guns, rape and murder, rates would explode. People would just be fucking stabbed in the streets every day and we're all in grave danger, extremely kind of far right angle. So to avoid either confirmation bias

as much as humanly possible, I really tried to just include stats and data that back up the append, or sorry, I'm not just going to do it, I only include stats and data that back up the opinion. I already had before I started in research. And with this topic, you can easily do that. And that's why I see so much over the media right now.

I mean, you can find tons of info that'll make it look like holy shit, we gotta fucking get rid of everything right now. And then you can find also tons of info where you're like, wait a minute, I don't know the guns of the problem. I mean, there is a lot of info on both sides. And I feel like most people just pick their side and just push that info, which is not fucking helping anything.

Yeah, yeah, so to avoid that, I looked at a ton of varying sources this week. I leaned a lot on boring ass stats, to be honest, from sources like the Department of Justice, other governmental agencies. I know boring stats aren't always the most fun, but they're fucking important. I'm gonna try and make it as fun as possible. And we're going to

look through a variety of those today. I looked at articles from pro-gun advocacy groups and also articles from places like the Atlantic, which on issues like this one promote a like obviously, and I would even say preposterously liberal angle with all the public shootings, especially school shootings, this subject is going to be a strongly emotional one for many of you, which I get. I'm well aware of the marches and protests regarding banning assault weapons happening right now. A huge protest march went right by my hotel this past Saturday in Cleveland.

I was staying downtown at the Hyatt thousands of protesters march right outside my window on Saturday as I did research for the suck. That much more pressure to get this shit right. And because the emotional nature of this topic, the rawness, I ask you to do your best to push down the emotions, this invokes in you. Punt not intended, don't let this trigger you. For the roughly 90 minutes,

it's gonna take to convey today's information. There are too many voices speaking right now in the media from an emotional place. And I understand why that's happening. Coming from a place of grief, that sort of talk doesn't help anyone understand an issue like this. Just going to a place of guns are bad. Let's get rid of them.

It's childish. That's an overly simplistic thought. And you're going to find out why as we go through this and we can do better than that. Knowledge is fucking power and form decisions are the best decisions. Let's learn as much as we can, make the best ones we can. We're going to take an in depth look, deep dive, United States gun policy and how the policy effects our culture and our daily lives.

I wanna give you the most tasks possible. You know, I wanna raise some points, you may not have thought of surrounding this issue, and I'm sure you're gonna send me some perspectives and some facts on this topic in the coming weeks, but I hadn't thought of them. I'm sure you're gonna get a lot of great updates out of this. So let's get into the timeline, a baby one today

to understand our history with guns a lot more in America's historical relationship with them. Let's go into that timeline right now. Shrap on those boots soldier, we're marching down a time suck timeline. 1250 CE. The origin of gunpowder is unknown. Maybe not. Maybe a Kurt Furst in either China, Turkey or Europe.

Definitely not Poland, because those subhuman savages can barely tie their damn shoes. Let alone invent something important. Kitty, I ran into several Polish fans of Cleveland who bustled my balls about me constantly bustling the balls of Polish people here in the suck. Love teasing my wife's family. It was boisterous, pierogi eating beautiful bastards. Now gunpowder of some form was referenced in writings from the 9th century CE in China way before that.

The ancient Romans referenced something called Greek fire. Some type of incendiary weapon used at least as early as 672 CE way before that during the Han Dynasty. A man named Wei Boyang was first to write anything about what would probably was gunpowder in China. He wrote about a mixture of three powders that could fly and dance violently, but the first record describing the actual combination of charcoal, sulfur, and salt Peter, uh, mixed to produce a rapidly burning or exploding powder is coated in some writing by Franciscan monk Roger Bacon right around 1250 CE. Uh, and then the army of British monarch, King Edward III,

first used a device called a hand cannon in battle in 1364 CE. It's the earliest version of a modern firearm. It was a handheld metal chamber with attached metal handle, very simple looking with the wiki lit by hand. And it was just what it sounded like, a tiny single shot cannon. It's extremely inaccurate, dangerous to use,

terrifying for enemies to hear and witness. It's been if it was mostly psychological. Like, if you have to get shot at by something, and it's not a low velocity pellet gun, get shot at by a 14th century hand cannon, unless someone is shooting you from just a few feet away, it's probably not going to hit you. 1424 CE mechanical device has been invented to fire the small hand cannon, the beginning of modern trigger technologies arrived. 1485 CE, British monarch King Henry VII, organized a core of the Yomin of the Guard and half of them were armed with a new weapon, the Harcobus, or also called the Arcobus, a handgun with a hook-like projection or lug on its under surface useful for steadying it against battlements or objects when firing.

It's like a rifle version of the hand cannon when you look at pictures of it. By 1485, these weapons had a sort of mechanical trigger. The earliest form of a musket or rifle, these early firearms had a matchlock, a device that connected a smoldering wick to the gunpowder with the pull of a trigger. Sounds time consuming and terrible. I feel like after a few shots, if I didn't hit something, I would just give up with one of those. And I guess the recoil was a mother fucker on those.

Like it would just knock you down. By 1630, Flintlock guns were a thing. The Flintlock did two things mechanically. It opened the lid of the flash pan and provided an igniting spark without a WIC. So the WIC is now gone. Black powder enthusiasts still messing around with the Flintlock rifles, man. Most dates have a special kind of hunting season for people who choose to use a muzzle loader. I remember a guy, this is how rural it was where I grew up.

A friend of my grandpa, I only knew him as buckhorn. Seriously, his name was Lawrence, I think, but he went by buckhorn. That is so back with Idaho. And buckhorn, of course, was a huge muzzle loader, aficionado. He was always talking about muzzle loading. But yeah, muzzle loader is just a gun. You load via the muzzle or barrel used to hunt with, similar to special archery seasons. And Idaho, in addition to muzzle loading and archery, there's also a special two-week

deer season exclusive to crossbow hunters. And an annual weekend deer hunt opened only to throwing knives. And Idaho County, Idaho, there's a one day set up to sundown, Elkhont opened only for the use of throwing stars. And then there's a never ending fist fight, bear season open to anyone who believed all of that bullshit I just talked about after archery.

You can't not with throwing stars. Actually, you probably can. There may not be specific regulation against that. I just, I don't know if that would be the, even if it is illegal, I don't, I don't feel like a game warden in the right mind is going to try to stop someone, uh, fucking, you know, chasing deer with an ninja star, especially if they get, especially if it works and they kill one, because if you do that, you're, you're, you're a fucking, you're a bad mother fucker or crazy or both. Uh, in July 4th, uh, 1777, America declares independence from Great Britain. The Revolutionary War is fought largely with muskets.

And those old muskets also sound terrible. It sound like a huge pain in the ass to work with. You would open a cartridge before every shot, you know, and it would have a little musk ball on some gunpowder inside. You have to load the barrel, you know, with a new lead ball for every shot, you'd have to pull the firing hammer back to the half cock position, load the priming pan with gunpowder for every single dam shot, then pour extra powder into the muzzle or barrel, then pour the musketball in, then stuff the cartridge paper down in order to keep the musketball from just sliding

back out, then push the lead ball as far down into the barrel as possible to ramrod, then cock the hammer and fire one time and hope that it worked. It often did not. Then do all of that shit all over again. It was fucking terrible, but it was still a more effective weapon than shooting an arrow or throwing a spear. I don't think anyone is really dicking around with muskets today outside of gun historians, you know, people like Buchorn and revolutionary war reenactors.

Reverend Alexander Forsyth, patents the first percussion ignition in 1807, which he developed after a rainy duck hunt in his native Scotland. He grew frustrated with the Flint locks notoriously slow firing time, one that allowed the birds to spot the flame from the pan, change course before the weapon actually discharged, misfires from wet gunpowder. His new lock is faster, keeps the firing powder inside the gun out of the elements. In 1823, Jacob and Samuel Hawking designed their eponymous rifle, which becomes the favored muzzle loader for hunting planes game with the barrel 33 to 36

inches long. I bet that son of a bitch was heavy. The Hawking rifle is shorter than the frontier long rifle and the 10 pound gun. Oh, okay, it's only 10 pounds. It's owned by some of the most famous hunters of the era. Teddy Roosevelt, ah, former suck topic right there. Kit Carson, Daniel Boone, let me do Daniel Boone one of these days. That's when my mom calls me to this day, Daniel Boone. In 1836, again, at very small tonight at hell,

I knew a guy named Buckhorn, and my mom calls me Daniel Boone. In 1836, first reliable multi-firing, handheld firearm hits the market, the Branson Tallahwacker. Now, the Branson Tallahwacker can fire eight shots in four minutes via its patented push clip loading mechanism. You can push a five-shot clip of bullets into the internal magazine, but had to use your hip to do so

if you were alone. And also, because of a design flaw, you had to point the barrel at yourself to do so. And after Charles Branson shot his dick off, was an 1835 prototype, it began to be called the Branson tallywacker. And that is horse shit. No, that would be a horrible gun design.

No, no, in 1836, Connecticut born gun manufacturer Samuel Colt received a US patent for a revolver mechanism that enabled a gun to be fired multiple times without reloading with a mechanism that automatically rotated over to the next bullet upon firing. Some dude named Elijah Hayden Collier out of Boston had already been messed around with an early Flintlock revolver since 1814, but the ones he was making were unreliable. They weren't semi-rotating so you couldn't fire multiple shots quickly.

Colt founded a company to manufacture his revolving cylinder pistol. However, sales initially were slow in the business floundered. Then in 1846, with the Mexican war underway, the US government ordered 1,000 Colt revolvers. In 1855, Colt opened what was the world's largest private armament factory, in which he employed advanced manufacturing techniques such as interchangeable parts and an organized production line. By 1856 the company could produce 150 weapons per day. Coat was also an effective promoter and by the start of the US Civil War, he had made the Coat Revolver perhaps the world's best known firearm. The first multi-shot rifle was introduced during

the start of the Civil War in 1860, known simply as the Spencer repeating rifle. Spencer repeating guns were designed, they were technically advanced. They used cartridges, a recent development, and could fire seven shots in 15 seconds. But the army didn't want initially to have a repeating gun, fearing that soldiers would just fire more often, and basically waste bullets and constantly need fresh ammunition and overtax their supply system. But in 16 or 1863, President Lincoln tests fire to Spencer and then his approval led to

the purchase of 107,372 Spencer repeating carbines and 144,500 of these ended up being made and the Spencer became the principal repeating gun of the Civil War. The Gatlin gun was invented in 1862. It looks more like a small cannon than a gun. This thing was not a handheld weapon and still was not unless you're the fucking punisher. It was a rapid fire, spring loaded hand cranked weapon and four runner of the modern machine gun. The pump action shotgun came around in 1882.

Christopher Spencer, Sylvester Roper, developed a pump action shotgun on which Roper was granted a patent in 1882, which led to the production of their model, 1890 pump action shotgun. The Spentio pump was in a heavy, ill-balanced and clunky to operate. By 1902, John Browning had developed a reliable, accurate, five-shot pump action semi-admetic shotgun. And by and by 1909 the shotgun as we know it today reliable establishing this final form 1896 Paul Mauser Mount oh shit you guys are gonna fucking probably go after me now. I didn't look up this before the recording

Mauser got dang it. He introduced the Mauser C96 broom handle the first mass produced and commercially successful semi-automatic pistol The browser, C96, broom handle. The first mass produced and commercially successful semi-automatic pistol, which uses the recoil energy of one shot to reload the next. They can fire 10 rounds without the need to reload. Clearly I haven't been talking about that. Handgun with anybody for a long time, because I, ah, Mauser, I hope that's how I'm saying it,

saying it correctly. Anyway, various prototypes designed in the late 19th century, the first true effective machine gun to be put into widespread production was the M1917 Browning machine gun, Browning. That's the word I feel confident about. I can, I can, I can, I can, it's Browning, I'll goddamn day long.

That was put into production in 1917. It could fire some 450 rounds a minute, 450 rounds of minutes, over seven shots a second. I mean, eventually it would overheat, but man, holy shit. That is gonna tear whatever it hits the fucking pieces. Now let's talk about the M16. This is the gun I dreamed of running through the woods with

as a kid, some type of red dawn. All hell has broken loose scenario. When I think of machine guns, I think of the M16. I think most people do. The M16 is the one widely used by the US military beginning in 1964. It's the machine gun associated with Vietnam. When you see a stencil of a machine gun, odds are it's going to be an M16. If you ask for a tattoo of machine gun, odds are M16.

In 1969, it came standard with a 30 round magazine. It can fire at a rate between 750, 900 rounds per minute. Total worldwide production of M16s has been approximately 8 million. Make it the most produced firearm of its caliber. It's a highly modifiable weapon. War, all current M16 type rifles can mount under barrel, 40 millimeter grenade launchers, such as the M203 and the M320. Both use the same 40 millimeter grenades as the as the older stand alone M79 grenade launcher. The M16 can also amount under barrel 12 gauge shotguns. So you can have a shotgun on your fucking M16 can also be modified to have an under barrel tear gas riot control launcher. It can have a bayonet attached

new M16s also have built in MP3 players Bluetooth voice command firing software internal hand sanitizer dispensers, single drink, curing coffee dispensers, and a small LCD screen where you can play either MISPAC man or 7P. Get the fuck out of here. Of course, I made up everything after ban it. But it does have a lot of crazy stuff. And the M16 is an important weapon to bring up in today's discussion because it relates to the most controversial assault weapon on the market today, the AR-15. The Colt AR-15 is a lightweight magazine fed gas operated semi-automatic rifle, which the AR stands for armor-like, by the way, not assault rifle. And it's the semi-automatic version of the M-16.

And you can get 5, 10, 20, 30 round magazines, and it fires as fast as you can keep pulling that trigger. And technically, not only can you buy an AR-15 fires as fast as you can keep pulling that trigger. And technically, not only can you buy an AR-15, you can also buy an M16 today, kind of, it's complicated. And let's hop on out of this timeline to talk about that. Good job, soldier. You've made it back. Barely. Okay, so now we've run through a brief and admittedly incomplete overview of the history

of fire on development. You know now if you didn't before that handheld weapon, that handheld weaponry, more powerful than a muzzleloader really hasn't been around that long. Automatic and semi-automatic weapons came around long after the Second Amendment was drawn up, which is part of the cultural debate going on right now, and there's no getting around that. The difference in firepower between the days of the founding fathers and now is tremendous. There were no semi-automatic or automatic handheld guns back then.

There just wasn't. What is the difference between semi-automatic and automatic weapons? Pretty simple. A semi-automatic weapon fires one shot every time the trigger is pulled. An automatic weapon fires continually until the trigger is released. And this brings us back to the M16 and the air 15. I didn't realize until I came across an article in the Washington examiner that just came out in October of 2017, the technically fully auto M16s are still legal, but very hard to get

a hold of. let me explain here and it again in may have you know eighty six president reagan signed the firearm owners protection act which among other things made a sale of fully automatic firearms manufactured before that year illegal only the guns are still legal it's just uh... exceptionally difficult and very expensive to get your hands

on one to to legally own a fully automatic weapon requires three things money time It's just exceptionally difficult and very expensive to get your hands on one. To legally own a fully automatic weapon requires three things, money, time, and an absolutely pristine criminal record. Anyone who wants one must first have a lot of money when Reagan made only an automatic weapon manufactured after 86 illegal, the federal government kept the supply, making the guns left in circulation prohibitively very expensive the whole supply and demand economics. For instance, while a brand new semi-automatic AR-15 can cost as little as $450 on sale,

the fully auto M-16 version costs upwards of 20 grand. By the way, I've been on so many websites where you can buy assault rifles and explosives the past few days that I am positive that if I wasn't already I am now for sure on some sort of government watch list So many Google searches of shit like where can I buy grenade how many grenades can I buy how many AR 15s can I buy Where can I find an M at 16 our grenade launcher still legal in Idaho? I still can't believe that if I wanted to take the time to get the proper level of registration I could get an AR 15 with an under the barrel mounted grenade launcher Uh, just I could get that ordered right now.

Oh, feel like before I consider getting that, I have to build a panic room slash doomsday prepper bunker. Anyway, to get a, uh, not a magic rifle has to be a gun that was manufactured before 1986 must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Records database. There are less than 500,000 full automatic weapons in circulation as opposed to the millions of semi-automatic rifles. Then you gotta find a dealer, which is hard.

Back in the 1930s, you could order a belt-fed machine gun. Like the ones used in the front line of, you know, front lines of First World War were won through the mail. You could just like fucking have that shit Amazon to your house, essentially. Not possible today. Anyone who wants to own a fully automatic weapon must find a dealer who possesses not only a federal firearms license. They have to find a dealer who has gone through additional background checks and who pays increased licensing fees.

A class three dealer, someone who's undergone extensive investigation by the ATF. Again, I probably would not make the cut and maybe that's best for everybody. Before buying a fully automatic weapon, a person must pay a $200 tax, register an application with the federal government. That means filing out a 12-page application, submitting fingerprints, sending in photos, current photos to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives. And then there's the whole thing, have you been a felon? Have you been, are you a felon? Are you or have you been committed to a mental institution? Are you a domestic abuser?

How big is your penis? How clean is your vagina? The wrong answer on those first two questions means you're probably never getting an M-16. I guess first three questions. The wrong answer on those second two questions or the last two questions means you're probably going to spend most of your life alone. Other than a few parking tickets, are you a citizen in good standing? No, well, then good luck getting approval. Even if you're Johnny by the book, a record of civic responsibility is also still not a guarantee of immediate approval.

Every application apparently varies as far as length, but the average time seems to take between nine months in a year because the people at the ATF, they take their time, they want to make certain, sure that certain applicants, you know, have dotted their eyes, crossed their teeth, and that they're considered safe and responsible to own a fully auto firearm. Assuming one has the record and the patients to pass the background check along with the actual cast to purchase the firearm and finally does get the gun, now that person finds himself subject to a host of new regulations. The ATF registers the new fully automatic gun owner. They notify local law enforcement of the name and address of the person who owns it. And they strictly regulate the transportation of these weapons.

If a civilian wants to cross state lines with their new purchase, they have to apply for permission. It can take weeks, if not months, to get that permission granted. You know, like if they wanted to tend like the big sandy machine gun shoot in Arizona, it happens annually. And important to note about the M16, no M16 has been used in any of the recent school or public shootings. Okay, so let's talk about some recent shootings and the types of guns that were used during those shootings

since that seems to be the main point of contention right now. That's what all the recent high profile high ratio of celebrity cameo protests have been about. The Vegas shooter last year used several AR 15s and he used AR 15s to adapt with bump stocks. I'm sure you've heard that term now. The bump stocks he purchased online allowed him to fire as many as nine rounds per second. And they can be bought in many different forms on the internet.

And without bump stocks added to numerous AR-15s he owned, he wouldn't have been able to light up over 500 people on October 1st at the Harvard Music Festival. And bump stocks looks like those are going away. We'll talk about that in a bit. The AR-15 and other semi-automatic rifles can be modified with these devices to become fully auto by harnessing a gun's natural recoil,

allowing it to bounce back and forth off a shooter's trigger finger, and one bump stock can unleash up to 100 rounds in seven seconds, according to an ad I found, on slidefire.com, again, probably gonna have authorities questioning about my Google history here shortly. If all of a sudden the podcast just go away,

just assume that I'm being detained somewhere. The recent Parkland High School shooter also used an AR-15 killing 17 people, the Sandy Hook shooter, using AR-15 killing 27. Neither of those AR-15s had bump stocks. The Columbine shooters did not have AR-15s. They had shotguns. One had a semi-automatic high point 995 carbine, a 9 millimeter with 13 10 round magazines. And the other had a tech nine semi-automatic handgun with 152, 132, and 128 round magazine.

Okay, keep throwing around these terms. What is a magazine? Time for some more terms. Big thanks to some of my time-soaker gun-efficient autos for making sure I got these terms correct this week. I know in some past episodes, I messed them up. So let's talk about a magazine.

A magazine, the definition is a periodical publication containing articles and illustrations typically covering a particular subject or area of interest. Something you read for information like Esquire or popular mechanics or hustler or swank or bound and gagged. Those are different kinds of magazines. Some of those examples actually are very different types of magazines. A gun magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm. Magazines can be removable, they can be detachable or integral, they can be internal fixed, to the firearm.

Various jurisdictions ban what they define as high capacity magazines. For example, in California, as of July 1, 2017, you can no longer legally possess a magazine that holds more than 10 bullets. Idaho has zero regulations on high capacity magazines. Again, Idaho, you can kind of just do what you want. Previously on an old episode of the Suck, I called a magazine a clip. So what is a clip? A clip can reference a device that is used to store multiple rounds of ammunition together

as a unit, ready for insertion into the magazine or cylinder of a firearm speeds up the process of loading and reloading the firearm as several rounds can be loaded once rather than one round being loaded at time. So you can have a bunch of bullets like a, you know, a big clip of bullets as opposed to having to put in each bullet at a time into the magazine. Okay. So now back to weapons used in high profile public shootings. The Virginia Tech Shooter used a Glock 19 pistol and a Walther P22 pistol, no AR-15, no rifle of any kind.

Glock 19, why the use and law enforcement has a standard magazine capacity of 17 rounds. And you have to pull the trigger to fire each and every shot. The P22 comes with a factory magazine of 10 rounds. Highest capacity upgrade I could find in my many searches was up to 15 rounds. And with these two handguns, the Schurke killed 32 people, important to note for today's discussion that no assault rifle was used in that particular attack. There was the Pulse Knight Club shooting of 2016. 49 people killed.

Another 58 wounded. The Schurke did use an this all rifle also a handgun He used a six hour MCX Semionomatic 223 caliber rifle with a 30 round magazine no bump stock use a nine millimeter glock Semionomatic pistol as a standard with a standard magazine capacity again of 17 rounds. She's like the the Virginia Tech guy There was the 2017 Sutherland Springs church shooting. 26 people died. Another 20 or wounded.

The shooter used a Ruger model AR5, uh, AR556 rifle. Come stand it with a 30 round magazine. The killer did not use a bump stock that day, but you could get a bump stock for that rifle. It could it can simulate automatic fire. I watched a YouTube clip where a guy fired 41 rounds in about four seconds with one of those adaptations.

2015, a married couple opened fire on an employee gathering taking place at Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, killing 14 people. They did so with two semi-automatic rifles modified to become a fully auto. There was a 223 caliber, Smith and Wesson M&P, 15 modified to become a fully auto and a 223 caliber DP or deep. Yeah, DPMS a 15 modified to accept a high capacity magazine to bypass the so-called bullet button, which makes removing a magazine easier. There was the umgua community college, you know, massacre in Roseburg, Oregon in 2015 a shooter killed nine people injured another nine.

Then was killed by police in a shootout. Good ridden's motherfucker, six weapons recovered at the school, five handguns and an AR-15. And I could go on and on and on. The Aurora school shooter in Colorado, the Binghamton New York shooter, some shooters from the years past, like a guy who just walked down 30 Second Street and Camden, New Jersey in 1949 and shot and killed 13 people with a Luger pistol. So when you look at the incidents of public mass shootings, first off, you notice there's Jersey in 1949 and shot and killed 13 people with a Luger pistol. So when you look at the incidents of public mass shootings, first off, you notice there's been a lot recently. I found a list of the deadliest single-day shootings from 1949 until the present. The list

included 34 incidents in which eight or more people were killed in some public place in one day. The top five deadliest incidents have all occurred since 2007. All but eight of the incidents have occurred since 1982. Only two incidents occurred between 1949 and 1982. Two in a span of 34 years, less than .06 mass shootings per year. four years, less than 0.06 mass shootings per year. 17 of the shootings have occurred in the last 10 years, 1.7 a year, right? Over 28 times the frequency. That is important to think about why now?

I'm like why now? The AR-15 has been on the civilian gun markets in 1964. Why weren't shooters lighting up schools in public events? Public places between 1964 and 1982. This is very concerning to me. And I think we should keep that in mind as we break down arguments for and against firearms. The most far left argument, again, is that guns are bad,

guns kill people, guns are killing students, true. You know, killing innocent people, true. And without guns, the victims of gun violence would be alive today, which is true. Well, let's look at those stats. We're gonna look a lot of stats, really pay attention, as much as you can to this part. I think it's really important.

Between 2006, 2016, almost 6,885 people in the US died from unintentional shootings. Accidental gun deaths occur mainly in those under 25 years old of age, until 2014. Almost 2600 kids between the ages of 019 died by gunshot and additional 13,576 were injured. In the US, over 1.69 million kids, 18 and under are living in households with loaded and unlocked firearms,

setting the scene for possible tragedy. A 2001 study found that regardless of age, people are nine times more likely to die from an unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with morgons. Makes sense. 2015, 36,252 people died from firearms. 11.3 for every 100,000 people. This includes everything from hunting accidents to suicide to gang violence for comparison 36,161 died in traffic related incidents 57,567 died in poisoning related deaths and almost 600,000 people died from cancer cancer

Now based on some of those stats the argument can be made that you know one death from gun violence is too many and we need to get rid of, get rid of the guns, right? Well, not that simple because what about the lives that gun save? I feel like this does not get brought up very much at all right now in the media, definitely not on the left. I guess it's just very quickly dismissed. I guess it's just not a sexy media angle. Maybe they think it's too complex to kind of dive into, but we're going to look at it. A lot of gun owners rationalized gun ownership, especially on the right,

when it comes to assault weapons, on the basis of defending one's home and family in case of a break-in. And in just life in general, is there merit to that argument? Let's look at some numbers. This is the fear I've had myself. Here are some interesting stats I gathered from the Department of Justice, summarized in a comprehensive 2010 governmental report. An estimated 3.7 million household burglaries occurred each year on average from 2003 to 2007. And 7% of all household burglaries during that time, a household member experienced some fort of violent victimization. So, a household member became a victim of a violent crime and 266,560 burglaries in that time period. Simple assault

15% of those was the most common form of violence when a resident was home and violence occurred robbery accounted for 7% of the violence rape accounted for 3% so over a five-year period That's roughly 8,000 home invasion rapes, 8,000 rapes, roughly that have been reported, roughly 40,000 violent assaults, 40,000. Think about those numbers. And these numbers weren't pulled from lackadoodle.fuckinghappytriggerfinger or get off my property. I'll blow your guy to him head off. You know, if you're wondering why you haven't heard about stats like this again, it's just, you know, these crimes don't tend to make the news.

There's too many to report. A classmate I knew in college was raped by a stranger during a home invasion. Never made the news. If I didn't, you know, wasn't, you know, kind of good friends with her friend, I don't think I would have ever even heard about it on campus. 30% of individuals experiencing violence during a completed burglary faced an armed offender. And by the way, I did know personally, other girls who were raped on campus by strangers. So I mean, it's just, yeah, it's crazy how often this stuff does happen.

Offenders were armed with the firearm and 23% of burglaries and households burglarized by a stranger were violence occurred. Unfortunately, the study I found, these stats within did not have stats regarding how many of the homeowners being burglarized were armed, which does make you wonder if some of these, you know, stats are a little bit politically motivated. It could just be, you know, simple human oversight. I mean, the Department of Justice and the FBI have so many stats when it comes to crime, but almost no stats when it comes to crimes deterred, which is harder to gather.

I do admit, specifically, it doesn't have anything, you know, with crimes deterred by the use or the mere presence of a gun. And that's important. I do admit. Specifically, it doesn't have anything with crimes deterred by the use or the mere presence of a gun. And that's important. Because sometimes, on the left, the stats will be pointed to where it's like yes, but how often were shots fired as somebody would during a break-in.

To me, that's not the important thing. How often was a gun held by the gun owner who then yelled, get outta here, I'm gonna shoot you? How many times did that happen? Because that is important. There was a study completed in 2008 under the Obama administration called priorities for research to reduce the threat of firearm-related violence,

which was investigated, research and written by the Institute of Medicine and by the National Research Council under funding provided by the National Academy of Sciences and both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the CDC Foundation. So, you know, a lot of big words, very important study. Within that study, the following piece of information is given.

Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed. Almost all national survey estimates indicate the defense of gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual use ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008. That's an important bit of info. What if a half a million crimes are truly prevented each year by the presence of a firearm, using the earlier stat of 7% of break-ins,

involving violence, 3% of that violence being raped, that's 35,000 violent crimes prevented in over 1,000 rapes prevented in just one year. How many people are killed during home invasions? According to the FBI, roughly 86 a year. How many of those deaths involved an armed homeowner versus an unarmed homeowner? Unfortunately, no data for that exists.

I mean, and don't the lives protected by guns matter just as much as the lives taken by them? It's something I feel like a lot of people just don't want to fucking talk about and it drives me crazy right now. You know, because it is celebrity, you would get, you know, torn apart by the left. If you fucking said that, like you're an idiot, even though the people saying you're in it have no fucking stats at all to back up their opinions. It in my experience, what I've been really seen, it's been really frustrating this past week.

So now also get another argument, more guns equals more death. That seems true, but, but is it some interesting stats here? The state with the most machine guns per capita is new Hampshire with 7.4 for every 1000 residents. New Hampshire also happens to have the lowest murder rate. Overall, New Hampshire has the 13th most guns per capita, 14.6 per 1000 residents. New York has the least amount of guns per capita, 3.3 guns for every 1000 residents, it has the 34th highest murder rate. So, you know, Idaho's number 6 with 24.2 guns per 1000 residents, 6 most guns per capita,

36 highest per capita murder rate. Wyoming number one by far, 195.7 guns for every 1,000 residents. Now to be fair, there's only about 2,000 people in Wyoming. No, it does have a small population. 582,658 is the last census. Only the 33rd highest murder rate, most guns by far, by far, 33rd highest murder rate.

So as you can see, there's not a strong statistical correlation between more guns per capita and more overall murder. There just isn't. So clearly there are a lot of other factors that go into murder per capita than the amount of guns on the market. The numbers don't lie. And these stats again are pulled from the FBI, not from, you know, by my machine gun, dot it comes with a grenade launcher or Armageddon weapons for the modern man, dot Boo-yah, motherfucker. So I mean, you could say yes,

but those murder numbers aren't gun specific murder numbers. Obviously, in states with more guns, there is going to be more gun specific murders. There are going to be more pool-related deaths, more drownings in states with more pools, right? Obviously, I don't think that's the important thing to focus on now. Isn't the overall murder rate? What's important, the overall saving of life or loss of life, what we really should be talking about.

Another argument I hear a lot is comparing violent deaths in the US to violent deaths and in other similar nations like the UK, Australia, Canada, you know, our countries with less guns actually safer overall from violent crime. Of course they're gonna be safer from gun violence. Again, they have less guns. Again, going back to the pool analogy.

But if you're being murdered, I doubt you think something like, oh, thank God I'm being stabbed right now. It's set of being shot. Oh, I'm sure glad there aren't as many guns in my country. This is a much safer, violent death I'm experiencing right now. So let's look into it. How does gun ownership compare between the US

and the rest of the world? And then how does that correlate with murder rates? Small arm survey is a research project run by Swiss University that publishes a ranking of estimated civilian gun ownership by country. It's actually really, really great stuff out there with this survey. According to their data, the US has the most guns

per capita of any nation in the world by far with 88.8 guns for every 100 residents. Yemen is number two, with 54.8 guns for every 100 residents and you will never guess number three unless you've already heard about it from some article. Switzerland, yeah, I swear swear neutral old switcherland has forty five point seven guns for every hundred residents and here i thought they were just focused on some kickass milk chocolate

and recall uh... uh... finland has forty five point three guns for every hundred residents another interesting one sweeten thirty one point six guns for every hundred residents you know that a lot of hundreds in some of those countries. So let's look at the countries with the highest murder rates in the world. And here's some 2013 stats.

Honduras, number one, 74.6 murders for every 100,000 people. El Salvador, second with 64.2. A lot of that is gang related, drug trade related, Venezuela, third with 62, the United States is right now is 3.9 Yemen 6.7 Switzerland 0.5 I guess that from 2013 to a 3.9 think about that said Switzerland has a third most guns per capita but the lowest crime rate in the world lower than the UK UK has UK has .9 murders per 100,000. Yeah, lower than Canada's rate of 1.4, lower than Australia's rate of one, gun related deaths per capita are higher

in Switzerland, elsewhere in Europe, 3.1 per 100,000 compared to the next highest 2.9 for Austria and 2.65 for France. Make sense, They have more guns than anyone else in Europe, but overall homicide lower than anywhere else in Europe. This is very important. And a lot of the, most of those deaths from guns like in Switzerland that I read about, suicides. So you know, suicides who chose to use the gun.

So maybe coincidence? I don't know. Also, maybe there's less overall murders because people are afraid of being shot if they try to commit a murder. I mean, I feel like you have to at least consider that, that. Also, most of Switzerland gun if they try to commit a murder. I mean, I feel like you have to at least consider that thought. Also most of Switzerland's gun deaths, again, are your suicides.

So even within the staff there, I just threw out there, you know, you could argue that those people would have killed themselves just in a different manner. They didn't have a gun. Switzerland also ranked the fourth happiest country in the world in 2017 World Happiness Report. Norway, number one, Denmark and Iceland are two and three. Finland number six, Canada is eight. Australia is 11. The US is 15th, UK is 20, lots of guns, very little violent crime,

lots of happiness. So let's take a look at how Switzerland's gun laws and gun culture compare to our own. But first, let's check in with another sponsor. Time suck is brought to you today by Bojangles, House of Propostorist Prosthetic Weapons. Don't let the lack of a limb keep you from a needless amount of self-defense. At Bojangles, House of Propostors, Prosthetic Weapons, you can turn half an arm into a military grade napalm dispenser capable of turning a serene woodland forest into a pile of ash and terror.

You're not down to one eye. You're up a face-mounted laser able to melt through a 5-inch thick steel safe in under five seconds. You're up a face mounted laser able to melt through a five inch thick steel safe in under five seconds. You're not missing two legs. You're just you just needed to make room for a new grenade launcher and a hip mounted gatling gun and those legs were holding you back. So come to bow jangles house of preposterous prosthetic weapons. Use the promo code time suck. Get a 20% better than normal chance of Get a 20% better than normal chance of both jangles not beating the shit out of you Not beating you unconscious because you think she worked for the feds and that you're trying to shut down in a highly illegal arms business Bojangles the one-eyed three-legged all pitball guardian of time suck Sorry, I know that was weird. Especially for your first time listener

We're done with sponsors today. I just need to take a moment Just take away from all the stats and away from the heaviness of today's topic. It had to make it weird for a second. Okay. All right. I'm back. Back to Switzerland. Gunner has about 2 million privately owned guns and a nation of 8.3 million people. In 2016, the country had 47 homicides with firearms.

Why aren't there, or why aren't there, you know, why are there a few related gun deaths there? There hasn't been a mass shooting since 2001. Well, first off, there doesn't seem to be a culture of fear around guns on Switzerland like there is here. I've known people, many people who are legitimately afraid to hold or even touch a gun. As if the gun would just jump up and shoot them

in the face by itself, or compelled them to kill everyone they know and love. There's so much emotion around guns in America, such a charged issue, so much fear. That doesn't seem to be the case in Switzerland. It seems much more cold and logical. Swiss children are encouraged to come to gun clubs where they're taught to respect guns.

One Swiss gun club member says, a lot of hyperactive children come to the rifle club. They learn to stand still, to concentrate for much longer, and it helps them get better results in school and in life. That's an interesting thought. The government holds an annual shooting contest focusing on accurate marksmanship for kids 13 to 17.

It's a big deal with massive participation around 4,000 kids compete each year in Zurich. Men are actually required to learn how to use guns in Switzerland because they have to serve in the military. Swiss males have to serve at least a total of 260 days in the armed forces beginning to age of 18. They receive 18 weeks of mandatory training followed by seven three-week intermittent recalls for training during the next 10 years. That training includes firearm training and women can volunteer to receive the same training.

Swiss authorities have a list of about 2,000 individuals, a suspect of being willing to commit shootings. All of them are frequently approached by authorities, along with psychologists, So, if you want to know if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it. And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it. And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it. And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it.

And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it. And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, you can go ahead and do it. And then, if you want to know what the best way to do it, dumb shit photos of the shooter holding an AR 15 or some similar weapon, you know, uh, and some social media post with comments like kill them all. You know, if you're posting a bunch of photos yourself with assault rifles, all over fucking Facebook or Instagram, you're making vague threats. You need to have your fucking head examined and you need to have your guns taken away. You stupid son of a bitch.

You know, I'd be totally comfortable with you getting put on a list, you know, of, uh, people authorities check up on a little more regularly. Some sociologists say that Switzerland's military service has a lot to do with lower rates of gun violence. Mandatory service allows authorities to do an extended background check on most citizens. Also, Swiss culture may have a lot to do with lower murder levels. The country's education system teaches kids early on to search for compromises. Instead of risking open conflicts. Hence, while most every home in Switzerland may have a weapon, access is still indirectly

regulated in the use of weapons, usually follows strict societal norms. Then there's the question of what Swiss guns are meant to defend against the Swiss government. The Swiss are sorry, they trust their government, more than citizens of other rich countries tend to trust theirs. So the tradition of gun ownership and it rose in switzerland more from the historic need to protect switzerland from invaders uh... then from the hypothetical need to overthrow its own you know tyrannical government and people are taught to like put their bullets and and you know and and actual uh... firearms in separate places

very different attitude also while switzerland has very relaxed gun laws compared to many of the world's nations That they're not as relaxed as the US laws and Switzerland's sematic semi-automatic rifles are legal Grenades and fully auto rifles are not and again, as you've seen there's tighter overall regulation Including Swiss authorities being able to decide on a local level whether to give people gun permits based on factors which include current psychological health. They also keep a log of everyone who owns a gun in their region. Notice a canton, though hunting rifles and some semi-automatic long arms are exempt from the permit requirement. Cantonese police don't take their duty, doling out gun licenses lightly.

They might consult a psychiatrist, talk with authorities and other canton about where a prospective buyer or gun buyer has lived before to really vet the person before giving them a license. People who've been convicted of a crime or alcohol or drug addiction are not allowed to buy guns in Switzerland. The law also states that anyone who expresses a violent or dangerous attitude will not be permitted to own a gun. Guessing that law weeds out those fucking internet nuts I was talking about earlier.

Uh, gun owners who want to carry their weapon for defensive purposes also have to prove they can properly load, unload and shoot their weapon must pass a test to get a license. I love that. If you're gonna be a gun owner for fuck's sake, know how to use your gun. Nothing worse than being around some jackass who doesn't take firearm safety seriously when you're hunting or shooting targets. I know I have been that jackass and my grandpa and stepdad have yelled at me to watch where the hell I am pointing to rifle where I'm standing or shooting because that stuff

is obviously very important. Okay, so what about current gun laws in America? What regulations do we have in place right now? Well, for starters, President Trump moved to ban bomb stocks just last week and I think that's pretty awesome. Give know, give credit where credit is due. This is something this past Friday, the US Department of Justice filed a regulation that will prohibit the devices fulfilling Trump's request to do so. The regulation would classify these devices

as banned machine guns under current federal law. The regulation will now undergo a 90 day period for public comments after what you could be changed or go into effect as is. As we stated earlier, under federal law, fully automatic weapons are technically legal only if made before 86. When Congress passed a firearm owners protection act, it's illegal to manufacture new auto weapons, automatic weapons for civilian use.

President Trump is also proposing several new laws to tighten up gun control such as improving reporting to the background check system, which is a big problem right now. And raising the legal age for purchasing assault style weapons from 18 to 21. Under federal law, license dealers may not sell a handgun to anyone below the age of 21, according to the Giffords Law Center,

but the limit is only 18 for the same license dealers when it comes to long guns, shotguns and rifles, and including assault weapons. So there were background checks required for various gun purchases in the US, but these policies are underfunded, they're under enforced. For example, although there are no waiting periods under federal law right now, a check that turns out inconclusive can be extended for three business days for further investigation.

But these three days are a maximum for the government, and sometimes the three days laps without the FBI completing his check because he just don't have the manpower. A buyer can at that point purchase a gun without the completed check, which is not good. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives is the agency that licenses gun dealers. The ATF defines dealers as people who repetitively buy and sell firearms with the principal motive of making a profit. The ATF says that people who make occasional sales of firearms from your personal collection do not need to be licensed.

The agency folks on a whether to sell a present or herself as a dealer, for example, if the seller is advertising, has a business card or accepts credit cards, the ATF would see those signs of a professional dealer restocking inventory also assigned. And the ATF says all dealers must be licensed regardless of whether they're selling guns in cyberspace at gun shows or at brick and mortar stores. In some states, unlicensed sellers can make private sales without conducting a background check,

which is fucked up. All federally licensed gun dealers must run checks on every buyer, whether a purchase is made in a store or a gun show. And that check works like this. A buyer presents his or her ID to the seller, fills out an ATF form, form 4.4, 7.3, with personal info, such as age, address, race,

criminal history, if any. The seller then submits the information to the FBI via toll-free phone line or over the internet, dating she checks the applicant's info against databases, and the process can take as little as a few minutes. And again, required information includes name, address, place of birth, race, citizenship, social security numbers, optional, although it was recommended. The form asked

questions such as, have you been convicted of a felony? Have you been convicted of a misdemeanor, crime of domestic violence? Are you an unlawful user of or addicted to marijuana or any other depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug or any other controlled substance? Are you a fugitive from justice? Have you ever been committed to a man's institution? I wonder if the history of that check, anyone who didn't have something on their record, just was like, oh, no, yeah, no, I'm doing a lot of blow right now.

I haven't been arrested, but I do Coke. I would say three, four times a week. I doubt that's ever happened. Of course, many guns are bought and sold illegally. Others are sold legally, but without background checks, since the system is only used by gun sellers again with a federal license. The federal government does not track nationwide gun sales, reliable data on how many sold

is scarce. A time-sucker, I've known for a bit now, who's been a cop out somewhere in the Midwest and keep it a little vague form. Good dude named Nate Nalti, who has served and protected for many years, had some interesting thoughts about private sellers. He wrote me saying, believe it or not, my views have actually slid to the left on gun control over the years, do mainly due to my time as a cop. I used to be a big fan of private sales, you know, which is more individual, can sell to another individual in a state with no

checks. As long as it's, you know, each show a valid ID and can attest that they can legally own it, it's a good sale. Legal. You know, this is what's called the gun show loophole. And at one point, I was all for it, did it myself, but now I'm 100% against it. Because basically, anyone with a state ID can lie to a guy walking around and buy a gun. Think about that. Scary. I have no problem with person in person sales. I just believe it should have to go through a dealer and background check. So it's legal. This is where I differ from many on this issue. A lot of people say, well, that's illegal if you lied. So it's not a loophole. Yeah, sure, but the bad guy still gets the gun and this could easily be stopped.

We have gun shows here monthly where I live. Normally, don't go to them anymore. You have these guys walking around me called Hawks and they try to buy low from people when they walk in and then turn around and sell them to someone else. This is extremely illegal, yet they do it. Maybe not right away, but the next day they can say they took it home, didn't like it, changed your mind, whatever. I've seen these guys do it. They don't care who they sell to. The gun show loophole is a big topic. So I figured if you haven't ran into it yet, I would let you know about it and explain it in the easiest way. Well, thank you, Nate, and thank you for sharing that not just with me, but with this all. So as you can see, law is concerning guns here in America and the enforcement of them. A little bit wonky,

not the best system right now, not an airtight system for sure. And that's a problem. Let's talk about mental health for a second. I'm against it. I've been crazy my entire life, and I plan on staying that way and making as many other people as fucking crazy as possible.

Wait, no, wait, wait, what? No, let's talk about mental health as it pertains to gun control. Excuse me. So many of these shooters seem, as I've said before, with my standup to be photogenically insane. As you can diagnose some sort of mental illness by looking at a picture of them. But I wonder how they got a hold of guns in the first place. And that made me wonder, what laws do we have in place regarding mental health and gun

control? Well, under federal law, a person can be tallied in a database that, uh, and barred from purchasing it or possessing a firearm due to mental illness under two conditions. If he or she is involuntarily committed to a mental hospital, or if a court or government body declares them to be mentally incompetent. In many states, including Florida, law enforcement can take an individual to a mental hospital against their will for initial evaluation, if after 72 hours the doctors observing the individual want to continue that treatment,

they can petition a court for permission even against the patient's wishes. That, a court order allowing a person's continued involuntary institutionalization is one thing that should stop an individual from purchasing a firearm. If the person was taken in for mental treatment involuntarily, but was not requested to be held past 72 hours. They're not blocked from buying any guns. A licensed gun dealer is required under federal law to run potential buyers through the criminal background check system.

And again, that's that quick process. It takes a few minutes. And if all the records in the right place, you know, this would prevent a perchedter who is previously involuntarily committed or educated as mentally incompetent from getting the gun, but federal law doesn't require states to make these mental health records part of the background check system. So many failed to voluntarily report the record. So a lot of times when people are committed,

they still can buy a gun, because when they do the background check, nothing shows up. Yeah, and again, you know, like we've been saying, there's these private, you know, gun sales, you know, you don't have to just go through licensed shop, you can buy guns, you know, for someone online and the classified ad, you can buy it from a fucking yard sale,

buy it off a street corner. You know, this just doesn't seem to be a great idea. Again, laws vary wildly from state to state. It's not like anyone in the state line is also checking your vehicle to make sure that the gun legal in your state is legal in their state. It's a big problem. Everything is incredibly fucking confusing.

You know, the laws vary wildly, so it is enforcement. So what's the answer? What do we do? I wish I knew. I'll share some final thoughts and resummarize what I've already laid out. But first, let's check in with some people who know exactly what to do with guns.

Let's check in with some idiots of the internet. I went to a video today published on February 17th of this year. I went to a video today published on February 17th of this year. The video was posted by CNN and the title is Florida Student to NRA and Trump we call BS. It's Parkland High School shooting survivor Emma Gonzalez. She's been in the news a lot lately. The young woman with a shaved head who has become the face of the current call for gun control.

The video has almost 3 million views over 60,000 comments. And one of the first comments I read is from YouTuber Levi Parento who posts, never trust anyone who looks like they've just been deloused. And then under this comment, YouTuber, didgeness unknown posts, it doesn't matter how old you are or where you came from or what you look like. Okay, okay, comment, commoners looking promising so far, those guys gonna stand up for Emma, right? Then they continue, any scum of the earth

who threatens their fellow human beings with taking away the right of self-defense is not deserving of one Iota of respect. Ah, man, they both shit on Emma. And look, full disclosure, I don't agree with a lot of what Emma has been saying. I don't think it's realistic just to get rid of guns in America, but I certainly don't hate Emma and I certainly don't want with a lot of what Emma has been saying. I don't think it's realistic just to get rid of guns in America,

but I certainly don't hate Emma, and I certainly don't want a disrespecter. She's a fucking high school kid grieving the recent violent deaths of her classmates. She is Christ. She's almost killed herself. Of course, she's going to be very anti-gun right now. Can you blame her? I can't.

And why can't you respect someone who's opinion differed a little bit from your own? I realize how truly important it is, more and more to listen to their side unless it's flat earth. We got to stop playing these liberals versus conservatives bullshit games. That's what it is. It's a silly game. The real answer is usually in the middle, most of the stuff, when it's not obvious, a scientific

kind of discussion. You never get to hear the middle if you're only talking to people on your extreme side of the issue. A user Dolores Pritchard leaves a following comment under this video. She posts, does anyone know why Germany did not invade Switzerland and World War II? They decided it would not be an advantageous since nearly every adult male has an automatic rifle and pistol most still do. Maybe young lady you should research why their society is different from ours.

Their lies the problem dear, band guns and they will make more effective weapons such as bombs. I gotta say Dolores, I fucking love you. With the name Dolores, you may be a thousand years old. But I don't care. If Lindsay ever leaves me, look me up Dolores. I like the smart headrest on your shoulders.

Just including this comment because it leads me to what I wanna talk about at the end of the episode. A user heart bleeds for you, brings up another interesting point posting, Japan has not had mass shooting, but they have had mass stabbing in 2016. A man with a knife killed 16 people, thus proving you don't need a gun to kill a bunch of people.

This really is a great point. And actually, in the incident the poster was talking about, the killer stabbed 19 people to death and wounded another 26. The killer was an employee of a facility for the mentally disabled and those are who he attacked, so sad. Guns aren't the only weapons that can be used in an attack

on a school. The deadliest school attack in US history actually occurred in the little town of Bath, Michigan. In 1927, when a 55 year old school board treasure dynamited the school he was on the board of and killed 44 students and faculty injured 58 others. He didn't light up the place and a hail of bullets. He blew them the fuck up. But this section is supposed to be for

stupid comments, right? Okay, yeah, here's one user flat earth, user flat earth revolution revolution posts. I'm sick of this girl's damn mouth Thanks flat earth That really needed to be posted Also, it's damn with an N in this context unless you think her mouth is a barrier Constructed to hold back water and raise its level the resulting reservoir being used in the generation of electricity or as a water supply I'm guessing you were going for DAMN, which means to condemn, especially by the public expression of disapproval. As in, I bet someone with a YouTube

handle of flat earth revolution doesn't have one damn intelligent thing to say about anything ever. All right, one more dummy. User CJ HUD goes full false flag saying, Emma is a good actor, exclamation point. I am so fucking tired of this false flag shit. And I'm not someone who thinks banning guns is the answer, which I'm gonna talk about in a second. But when you think this is all part of some illuminati new world order covert plan that these victims are,

just people paid to pretend they were involved in a shooting that never happened, well then you've got full David Ike Wackadoodle. Shot the fuck up with the false flag stuff and actually have a grown-up conversation about these issues. Instead of just being another idiot of the internet. Idiot. I'll be into that. Okay, so a lot of info today.

Holy shit, so much. When I decided to do this topic, I was pretty certain I was going to piss off a lot of my conservative listeners, again, to be fair. But I may have pissed off some more liberal listeners instead and some younger listeners. Not trying to. I understand the emotion behind, you know, many of you teenagers taking to the street with signs that say stuff like fear has no place in our schools enough is enough gun control now,

ban assault weapons, inaction is cowardly, gun reform now. And I love that you're doing it. I love that you're bringing this issue to the nation's awareness. And I do think some gun reform needs to occur. I do. First off, I think our government has to do a much better job in forcing existing laws, like with the background checks.

That's crazy. How shitty that is right now I also think private sellers at gun shows should be held to much tighter federal regulations And I think if you want certain assault style weapons like AR 15s You just have to take a psychological evaluation and be held to a higher criminal standard that someone who buys like a like a basic Bulldoch and you know dear rifle like the test you have to take to get an AR 15 You know with the fucking under the barrel grenade launcher needs to be way more comprehensive than the testing to take for a 22 bold action rifle.

There should be different tests for different classes of weapons, just like there are different types of driver's license tests for different driver's license licenses. And like with the Swiss, I think you have to be tested on gun safety and general gun knowledge. Much like we're tested to get a driver's license again It's a big responsibility to drive a car cars kill more people than guns at their dangerous You can't just legally drive around you know without past a test

And I think it should be the same way for you know a rifle You know the answer to when do you get to light up your enemies with an AR 15 isn't the next time I see him at the mall And if that's how you fucking answer the test, then you're on a watch list forever. You dump son of a bitch. When it comes to banning guns entirely, while I personally don't think anyone needs an AR 15 or similar rifle, it's a bit too much fire power

for one person in my opinion, I'm not convinced that banning them is gonna make a big difference. I'm really not. It might not make any difference. I wouldn't feel safer in society after a might not make any difference. I wouldn't feel safer in society after a ban. I wouldn't. I wouldn't feel like my two kids, both of whom we go to public school are going to be safer. I know some of some of the Australian time suckers have written

in about how Australia changed its gun culture and that made it, you know, a much safer place to live in. On that, Australia introduced, Australia introduced a comprehensive gun control regime after a massacre in Tasmania in 1996. It was the Port Arthur massacre. 35 people were killed, 23 wounded. When a single shooter opened fire on a cafe with a Colt AR-15 SP-1 carbine, which is a semi-automatic rifle, less than two weeks after the Port Arthur massacre, all six Australian states agreed to enact the same sweeping gun laws, banning semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. They also put more hurdles between prospective gun owners and their weapons.

Australia has a 28-day waiting period now. Thuro background checks that require them to present a justifiable reason to own a gun. And mass shootings there have dropped to zero since that happened. You'll see that headline all over the place. Mass shootings then dropped to zero. But what that headline doesn't include is the fact that there was never a comparable attack on australian you know uh... public before

the port arthur massacres is history like fucking not ever it's not like the port arthur shooting was the last of many public mass shootings it was the only one of its nature australian history there were other mass murders committed on the average needs uh... there was some crazy arson killing some biker gang shootouts other random criminal stuff but nothing like one do just going up into a butchering strangers with a semi-automatic rifle uh... not nearly set degree

and the weapons using the port author attack in around for years and years years before the attack so again it was an isolated incident so that headline to me is virtually meaningless and just blatantly misleading after the attack yesterday government brought back uh... now illegal gun or bought back illegal guns from citizens the nineteen ninety six national firearms by back program took six hundred sixty thousand nine hundred fifty nine firearms that are probably out of private hands

uh... compromising long guns mostly semi-automatic rim fire rifles shotguns uh... pump bashing shotguns small proportion of higher powered military type semi-automatic rimfire rifles, shotguns, pump-assing shotguns, smaller proportion of higher-powered military type semi-automatic rifles. Because the Australian Constitution requires the commonwealth to pay just compensation for private property, the government paid a fair price for all that stuff. They paid over 500 million in total. Over the next few years eventually over a million guns were surrendered, surrendered.

Then in 2003, additional gun control regarding new handgun laws made illegal target pistols of greater than 38 caliber and handguns with barrels less than 120 millimeter, semi-automatic or 100 millimeter revolvers such as pocket pistols. 2017, Australia had a national firearms amnesty. The first since 96 in which individuals could surrender illegal firearms for destruction without criminal penalty because if you're caught within a legal firearm outside the embassy period you could face two hundred and eighty thousand dollars in fines uh... fourteen years in prison so over fifty seven thousand guns have been surrounded through that

and so have australia's per capita homicide rates drops in ninety six beginning of all this gun control yes they have actually uh... nineteen ninety six homicides australia cattle for one.6 murders for every 100,000 people. Right now, the rate is one murder for every 100,000 people. So they've dropped substantially have manslaughter sexual assault kidnapping and, however, manslaughter, sexual assault kidnapping and all saw peaks in the years following the band as did arm robbery and most remain near or above pre-band rates.

For example, figures from Victoria Police show a 51% increase in reported rapes over a 10 year period between 2004 and 2014. Can you blame less guns for other crimes increasing? Not definitively, but is it possibly related? Maybe. What about the reason for having guns in America in the first place? You know, what about that angle with his whole uh... issue we're talking about right now what about the basic militia angle of keeping not only other

governments from taking us over but keep in our own government check well uh... the argument that our citizenry consent to to the government army especially in this country i gotta say is probably pretty weak they're just a good historical examples of this usually working out you know usually armed up rise and squashed out because they have inferior firepower and are not organizationally prepared to stand up to a real army of far greater numbers and organizational capacity and ability. You know, there's probably not going to be some like red dawn successful

stand-up. It's it's probably going to be in reality more like Wolverines followed very shortly by, oh, shit, they have a lot of guys and a lot of guns. Man, I wish we had missiles and helicopters too. This is not looking good, followed by victory, by the government. However, I do think this, I raise this, I know this might make me sound crazy, but I gotta throw it out here. If the economy were to totally collapse,

if a catastrophic event were to occur, occur, if things got to a place where the government was no longer able to keep law in order, then I mean, those with guns are going to be, you know, far more likely to survive. I mean, are you kidding me? I've jumped about in the past on some standup, but it is true. Resources get scarce, you know, lawlessness and soos. Who do you think is getting all the good stuff? Well, people with the most guns.

Now again, I know, probably never going to happen, but I just like to throw that out there. But it's small possibility. And another interesting thought to consider with all this, the fact that most public shootings have occurred in gun free zones. Let's think about that. In another message, my police officer time sucker Nate brought up another important point, mass shootings occurring in gun free zones, right? I'm paraphrasing some what he said here. He said, you might want to look into gun free zones. That's pretty much where almost all the big shootings happen. Think about it. If you're going to kill people and want to be able to get the most bang for your buck, you're going to do it in a gun-free zone. The people there are basic lambs being

led to the slaughter, be it schools, 99% gun-free, movie theaters, most have signs saying no guns, churches used to be gun-free, but now are changing rapidly. And people's work, most employers, do not allow their employees to carry. Now look at the above and think about it. Aurora Theater, recent church shootings in Texas, every school shooting, some office attacks, you know, the attack where the guy went in and cut off a lady's head with the machete at her work, the San Bernardino shooting where a guy and his wife killed like 14 people during a work party, all those places have the same thing, this policy of no guns allowed. Unless you're a bad guy who doesn't care about that policy.

This is a valid point to bring up. The gunmen are going after targets in areas where they know people don't have guns. I was never worried about a mass shooting when I went to high school in Riggins, Idaho, because there was a parking lot full of trucks with gun racks and guns. Kids would go hunting after school, and if one kid decided to go crazy, know, with a gun, some other kid is going to go to his truck, grab his rifle and shoot that motherfucker long before the police show up. Or a teacher is going to grab their rifle or pistol from their car truck. And I'm not advocating going back to that because I feel like times have changed more than weapons have changed. And

this is the thought I keep coming back to. You know, do I think we should enforce better background checks and more criminal and psychological restrictions on certain classes of weapons? I do. I hope they raise the age on who can buy some automatic weapons to at least 21. I wouldn't mind 25.

Right? It's how old you have to be to rent a car. And again, I know that's easy for me to say when I'm 40. However, I also think folks in on getting rid of one type of gun is focusing on the bandaid and not focusing on the wound. Why is this shit happening more in the United States than other countries? There are plenty of other countries on getting rid of one type of gun is focusing on the bandaid and not focusing on the wound. Why is this shit happening more in the United States than other countries? There are plenty of other countries that have plenty of weapons.

Just because a weapon isn't legal doesn't mean a country doesn't have them. And Australia's recent gun at Amnesty handed last year a fucking rocket launcher was handed over as were numerous machine guns that have been out there this whole time. Mash students are on the upswing, even as other types of homicides and violent crimes have become less frequent in the US. In the US, there have now been at least 62 mass shootings in the past three decades, with 24 in the last seven years alone, according to a recent mother-john survey. This has happened even as the nations overall violent crime and homicide rates have been dropping. What is the explanation for the rise in mass shootings?

One theory is that certain types of killings breeds are somehow contagious. Back in 1999, four public health researchers published a famous study called Media and Mass Homicides in the Archives of Suicide Research. They studied a series of mass homicides in Australia, New Zealand, and Britain in the 80s and 90s, and found that different incidents appeared to be influencing or influenced by each other in a number of ways often spanning many years and across continents. The idea that one violent rampage might inspire another has given rise to plenty of articles and papers about whether the press should be more conscientious in the way it reports on these events.

Given a murder too much publicity might be a bad idea and I agree. I think we should slander mass shooters to a preposterous degree, right? What if we just posted stories about them, you know, just non-sense, but made them look horrible. Just posted stories about rumors floating around, about they were caught fucking a puppy, or something horrific, or maybe they went crazy because they were furious about having a micro penis so small that they literally did have to use

a pair of tweezers to jerk off. Now I'm being ridiculous there, I'm being ridiculous there. But I'm just saying like, what if we just painted them in the most pathetic negative light possible so that nobody else would want to get the attention that they're currently receiving? Mental illness is a likely factor in many of these shootings, surveyed by Mother Jones, found that at least 38 of 61 mass shooters in the past three decades displayed signs of mental health problems prior to the killings.

But if that's the case, why aren't more countries experiencing the same thing with their mentally ill citizens? The sad truth is, we don't fucking know why this is happening. Now, this is just pure speculation, but I think the recent rise in public shootings has something to do with the new. Fame is more important than why you become famous culture we live in. The started in the late 90s and early 2000s with the rise of reality TV, social media, on the web. Suddenly, people are becoming web celebrities and reality stars, and sometimes just for being spectacular assholes.

People like Paris Hilton going back further puck from the real world. You used to have talent. You used to have talent in a particular arena to become famous. You had to be a good actor, a musician, comic host, something, anything. You had to have a discernible form of talent, and then suddenly you can become famous for just being a piece of shit. And then thanks to the internet, entire chat rooms could devote themselves

to talking about how cool pieces of shit were, like the Columbine shooters. There was also suddenly 24 hour news stations, and instead of needing to fill a few hours of programming today with the news, they had to fill all day with the news. So the names of criminals get mentioned over and over and over again. Suddenly there's 20 new stations, so three, all competing for your attention.

Who can sell the tragedy the hardest? Who can sell the best ratings by talking about it the most? And these killers get talked about for months and months on end. I think that amount of media coverage combined with a desire for fame young people have that didn't exist before, because now you can be famous for just being a fucking idiot, for just being a piece of shit, drives crazy people to do things they maybe wouldn't have done otherwise.

They know they're not talented enough to become famous for something you know valid, but they also know that killing a bunch of students would get their name out there on the web forever. Who notes? Maybe that only makes sense in my head, something I thought about a lot. I don't know what to do, something I thought about a lot.

I don't know what to do, but I want to hear what you think. Sometimes you don't need to have the answer. Sometimes it's just important to keep the conversation going, one that might lead to someone else coming up with the answer. So send me yours, you know, for this Friday's time, sucker updates, send them going further. For right now, I got nothing else. Time for top five takeaways. Time, top five takeaways.

Number one, we've been arguing about guns since the second amendment was ratified in 1791. It's only 27 words long. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep in bear arms, shall not be infringed. Number two, the United States has the most guns per capita out of any nation in the world. Two of its cities, New Orleans and Detroit are on the top 25 for the most violent crimes per capita of any city in the world. However, Switzerland has the second most guns per capita and the lowest crime rate in

the world. What are we doing wrong? What's going on in our country outside of guns? Number three, we're banning a few weapons, really do anything to prevent more mass shootings. The worst school attack in US history happened nearly a hundred years ago and used dynamite. The deadliest school shot shooting in US history since was a Virginia Tech shooter killing 32 in 2007 with handguns. Number four, how many violent crimes do guns prevent?

They don't just take lives. Would more education around guns and mental health keep our kids and citizens safe? There is so much more research that needs to be done, so let's do it. Number five, new info, what about smart guns? Have you heard of these? The future solution to gun control will likely lie in tech smarts. You know, in 1999, a few years before the invention of the iPod, Jonathan Mossberg, family member and employee of the OF Mossberg and Sons, the nation's oldest family-owned gun

company began to build the eye gun. A computer chip equipped smart gun that could only be fired by its owner. But certain gun rights activists, advocates weren't ready for it, saw it as some sort of kind of gateway, some sort of Trojan horse into taking away their guns, but it does work. Just like my iPhone X recognizes my face to unlock and eye guns trigger, does recognize Joe's owner,

doesn't pull without the proper owner holding it. How much more sophisticated can weapons get? Can we eventually have invisible gun detection barriers around schools that send off alerts, lock schools down? It was protective barriers before students can even reach the front door. Concert and guns such as cinematic weapons come with owner recognition software so no one can take your gun and commit horrible crimes with it.

Could they recognize where you are via GPS technology and not allow you to fire at all in certain public areas. At the rate of tech advancement, I think this will all be possible and a lot of today's issues will be solved. It's what we need to do in the meantime that we still gotta figure out. Time suck, tough, five, take away.

The big gun debate has been sucked as well as I can suck it. Holy shit, that was intense. Hopefully at least sparks some new thoughts with all that and just, uh, no, just now, just no, excuse me, that whether you're a gun lover or a gun hater, you know, I get where you're coming from, even if I don't agree with your stance, uh, odds are, I feel like your hearts in the right place. And I hope you felt like, uh, my heart was in the right place with this one. Hail them rock. Also a bunch of free ringtones are now in the right place. And I hope you felt like my heart was in the right place. But this one, hand him rock.

Also, a bunch of free ring tones are now in the time sucks store, free ring tones for both Android and iPhone users. The show intro and outro, most of the segment intros are up as is a fanmaid, just pass on my crack. Remix ring tone. So put the suck on your phone, put in your brains, free. Now come see me, you bastards.

Get out there and grab some tickets to my flat earth tour. All over the South, it's early April. Some of those shows looking like they're gonna sell out before the night of the show, which is amazing. So get your tickets now, don't wait for the door. Those shows up at dancomas.tv, ticket links for upcoming dates and today's show description. Check out those dates, snatch up some tickets.

Thanks to Harmony Velocamp, Jesse Dobner, Lindsey Cummins, Josh Crel, the entire time sub team. Thanks for all the reviews and spreading the suck. Post on social media, reference it on Reddit. Spread that sweet suck. Every review helps so much. This Friday is a bonus episode. And there was no bonus episode vote. Here's why. There's just too many episodes and things happen right now for me to do bonus votes Going forward since two episodes are now decided each each month by space lizard votes over 2,000 space lizards now By the way, oh my god hit that milestone. Thank you so much Thanks for voting in a tool two cool topics every month, but in order to have proper prep time for all these extra episodes now I can't have three last minute topics every month and stay sane. So I'm picking the bonus episodes from the suggestions and

this Friday, Richard Ramirez, the night stocker, a serial killer who scares me like almost no other. He was a serial killer, rapist, burglar, highly publicized home invasion crime spree where he terrorized the residents of the greater alasair Angels area and a little bit later, the residents of San Francisco from June of 84 to August of 85. Prior to capture, dubbed the Night Stalker by the news media, used a variety of weapons, including handguns, knives, machete, tire iron, hammer, talked about Worshpen Satan, he was an evil, sadistic, maniacal piece of shit. And is it weird to say, I'm excited to suck him? Eh, I am.

And now let's find out what you suckers have been up to with this week's Time Sucker Updates. ["Sucker Updates"] ["Rubdates"] Get your time, sucker updates. All right, really fun update today, sending by so many suckers. Time Sucker's Cory Daniels, Rob Maggs, Noah Wooten, Ian Frazier, so many others let me know

that Mad Mike Hughes has attempted his homemade rocket launch. It's happened now after a couple failed launches. He's launched himself into the atmosphere to prove that the earth is flat and he didn't die. The 61-year-old Limble Driver and self-taught rocket scientist made it all the way. This past Saturday, all the way up to almost 1,900 feet above the Mojave desert near Amboi, California. He almost made it high enough to learn some stuff. To make it to the boundary of the Earth's atmosphere and outer space, the carbon line is its known, you only have to make

it to 330,000 feet. So he was so close. So close. He only had another 328,000 a hundred feet to go in his homemade rocket to make it to the place where he could see for sure that the Earth is round before then quickly falling and crashing to his death. So he still thinks you're this flat, but he is also alive.

So that's that part's good. Other than hurting his back a bit, getting some bumps and bruises, he feels good about the experience. Relieved, he said, after being checked out by paramedics, I'm tired of people saying I'd chickened out and didn't build a rocket. I'm tired of that stuff. I'm manned up and I did it. Ah, you did man up, man, my cues.

You manned up. Now if you could just brain up a little bit, it'd probably be good. Uh, this, this, this is from Brandon Stover saying, the idea of sucketh master, my brother's getting married next year and I'm his best man for a best man's gift. He bought us tickets to see you in Cleveland and it was absolutely awesome. We traveled from Pittsburgh on Friday afternoon, after the show, you and Lindsay set at the bar with us for a couple of hours and we just hung out and shot the shit that meant a lot to us. You two are great people. I just wanted to thank you. Keep on sucking.

Brandon Stover and Dan Flynn. Well, thank you guys. Thank you so much. It was great meeting you both and hanging out, especially with Lindsay there. She's coming more and more to the shows now. I just don't get to hang out often at shows. I know a lot of you guys offered to hang out. I appreciate it every time. 99% of the time I can't because I got to rush off to get some sleep for either media the next day or research or just because I'm fucking dog ass tired. But that night it worked out and I'm glad we had a great time and thanks for making that drive.

And finally, this in from Jeff Minibull. Minbull I believe. I hope I'm spelling that right. You know, these names. Now I feel like I gotta look it up again. Yeah, okay, okay Jeff. All right, I think I got it. Now Jeff wrote in saying, you son of a bitch.

I have put up with the McDonald's and I enjoy the Bojangles bits. But this goddamn piney or however the fuck you spelled those inbred hill names song, is the most obnoxious trash you have come up with. It was painful in its original episode, but I thought it would be like the Vlad songs and only appear in that episode. I was gravely mistaken. It has sunk its dirty, filthy claws into more episodes and immediately puts me to a seven on the old pissed off scale. For the love of Nimrod, praise be unto him, stop it. Though I will not stop listing my resentment

is not that strong. Please sprinkle it in like one out of every hundred bonus episodes only. Please. Well Jeff, I appreciate the input and I think you know what my answer is. Well, lucky here now I got some peak, take this peak, I already had a lick out of a woman's beard. Well, lucky here now with the full belly, I made a butt baby with the woman, oh man. And the governor's what we got. We're young! Gotcha, I got it, you just been pioneered. And thanks to all of you for today's time-soaker updates.

Thanks time suckers. I need a net. We all did. Have a fantastic week suckers. Be responsible when it comes to gun ownership and when it comes to gun control knowledge. Be nice to each other. Keep on talking about everything. And damn it, keep on sucking.